The Haitian interim prime minister recently requested U.S. military assistance following the assassination of the president, but there is significant popular opposition to having US forces in Haiti:
Intellectuals and members of Haiti’s civil society quickly criticized a call by Haitian officials for the United States to send in troops, citing earlier interventions by foreign powers and international organizations that further destabilized Haiti and left a trail of abuses.
“We do not want any US troops on Haiti’s soil,” Monique Clesca, a Haitian pro-democracy activist and former United Nations official, said in a post Friday on Twitter. “The de facto prime minister Claude Joseph does not have any legitimacy to make such a request in our name. No, No & No.”
US intervention in Haiti would be a bad idea even if there were broader popular support for it. When there is such strong opposition from Haitian civil society, the case for intervention completely collapses. The US supported Moïse before his death, so it is unlikely that US forces would be welcomed by the people that protested against his rule. That could make a US military presence in Haiti a cause of more instability. Because Joseph is not seen as legitimate by many of his countrymen, they will not recognize his authority to invite foreign forces into the country. US forces would be and would be perceived as invaders and occupiers. In my latest piece on Haiti, I said that we need to think about what purpose an intervention would serve:
Is the purpose of an outside intervention really to protect the country from disorder, or is it to prop up the political leaders that have thoroughly failed their people?
Read the rest of the article at SubStack
Daniel Larison is a weekly columnist for Antiwar.com and maintains his own site at Eunomia. He is former senior editor at The American Conservative. He has been published in the New York Times Book Review, Dallas Morning News, World Politics Review, Politico Magazine, Orthodox Life, Front Porch Republic, The American Scene, and Culture11, and was a columnist for The Week. He holds a PhD in history from the University of Chicago, and resides in Lancaster, PA. Follow him on Twitter.
Good call Daniel, Most all the foreign in-terventions have been bad, worse and horrible, The U.N intervention after an earthquake caused an epidemic of Cholera there in
Jul 14, 2021 Havana: Citizens give their opinion on recent events
After the recent events that took place last Sunday, teleSUR spoke with citizens of Havana about what happened.
https://youtu.be/q5cn7zNvMi8
The Cubans speaking to the Media have a good point: the embargo against Cuba is the problem and not the Cuban government which most Americans say is the problem. Many people blame all the poverty in Cuba and other nations with which we do not trade or have limited trade on the governments of those countries. They say every country should take care of its own people.
The US tells its allies to only trade with nations that trade with the US. It fines foreign companies doing business with whom the US does not trade. It urges the UN to impose sanctions against the same countries.
The US destroyed the infrastructure of Southeast Asia during the Vietnam War and Iraq during the Gulf War, the period between the Gulf War and the Iraq War and during the Iraq War. It destroyed Libya during the war there and is destroying Syria in addition to Iraq and destroyed Panama to find Noriega.
The UN is funded by the Global Bankster’s Pinkprince.
Nov 9, 2011 The Cuban Revolution CIA Archives Documentary History (1960)
The Cuban Revolution was a successful armed revolt by Fidel Castro’s 26th of July Movement, which overthrew the US-backed Cuban dictator Fulgencio Batista on 1 January 1959, after over five years of struggle. “Our revolution is endangering all American possessions in Latin America. We are telling these countries to make their own revolution.” — Che Guevara, October 1962
https://youtu.be/tBdv1PROLFA